JAIPAL Vs. SURBHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant-husband has filed this appeal challenging judgement and decree dated 7. 12. 2016 passed by the District Judge, Panchkula whereby a petition filed by respondent-wife under Section 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") has been accepted and a decree of annulment of marriage of the parties has been passed.

(2.) The case set up by respondent-wife, in her petition under Section 12 of the Act is that she had developed friendship with the appellant when she was aged about 14/15 years and on 18. 2014 the appellant took her to a temple known as Prachin Shiv Durga Temple, Panchkula where they exchanged garlands. It is averred that neither parents of any of the parties were present nor ceremony of Saptapadi was performed and as such, there was no valid marriage in the eyes of law. The respondent further averred therein that they never lived together even for a single day and the said marriage had not been consummated and she has been residing with her parents prior to and even after 18. 2014. The respondent-wife specifically stated in her petition that her consent had been obtained by the appellant by coercion. The respondent thus prayed for annulment of the marriage by passing a decree of divorce.

(3.) The appellant-husband in his written statement raised preliminary objections as regards the maintainability, estoppel etc. He took a stand that the parties knew each other for more than 4 years prior to their marriage and had decided to marry despite being of different castes as the appellant is Jat by caste whereas the respondent is Bania. Appellant stated therein that they had married against wishes of their parents, out of their own free will and consent and that the marriage had been solemnized as per Hindu rites including Sindoor ceremony as well as Saptapadi ceremony before sacred fire in presence of priest and witnesses. After marriage they went to house of the appellant and disclosed about their marriage to the family of the respondent telephonically, upon which the family of respondent-wife threatened them of dire consequences forcing the parties to file an application before Superintendent of Police, Kurukshetra seeking protection. It is averred that an application was also moved before Human Rights Commission, Haryana.